Clubfoothead Posted November 21, 2002 Author Share Posted November 21, 2002 Grits and Shins:So by your train of logic great players that never played on winning teams should not be voted into the Hall of Fame? Their individual stats meant nothing because they were all achieved while their team was losing. You are WAY to smart for this stuff Blitz. I have said I don't know how may times on this thread that I am talking about the league MVP ONLY. So no you can get to the Hall of Fame by playing onlosing teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted November 21, 2002 Share Posted November 21, 2002 Clubfoothead: Grits and Shins:So by your train of logic great players that never played on winning teams should not be voted into the Hall of Fame? Their individual stats meant nothing because they were all achieved while their team was losing. You are WAY to smart for this stuff Blitz. I have said I don't know how may times on this thread that I am talking about the league MVP ONLY. So no you can get to the Hall of Fame by playing onlosing teams.So when placing value on player's in an effort to determine their HoF status you disregard the team they are on ... but when placing value on a player in an effort to determine who is the MVP you consider the team they are on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted November 21, 2002 Author Share Posted November 21, 2002 Yes. The Hall of Fame is determined by how good a player is compared to other players over the course of a career, period. To me, the MVP is/should be determined by how a player compares to other players in a particular season in conjunction with how valuable the player is to his team and how well the team does. What is valued in sports? Winning. The only thing ARod brought to the Rangers was a hell of an individual season that translated into NOTHING of value - a losing records and 31 games out. What is so vbaluable about a last place finish? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted November 21, 2002 Share Posted November 21, 2002 So if ARod had been a Mariner what would you have done then? Seattle had a good / winning year but played in the toughest division in baseball and did not make the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted November 21, 2002 Author Share Posted November 21, 2002 Grits and Shins:So if ARod had been a Mariner what would you have done then? The exact same thing I'd have done this year if it were up to me, given it to Soriano. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted November 21, 2002 Share Posted November 21, 2002 You have said that the goal is winning, that the MVP can NOT go to a team that does not win. So using that line of logic how can you justify the MVP NOT going to a player from the team that wins the World Series? The ultimate goal is to win the World Series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted November 21, 2002 Author Share Posted November 21, 2002 Grits and Shins: So using that line of logic how can you justify the MVP NOT going to a player from the team that wins the World Series? The ultimate goal is to win the World Series. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they vote for league MVP right after the season ends, I assume because they use the same standard as me the MVP has to get your team to the post season. Just speculation on my part but that is also probably why they award a regular season MVP and a World Series MVP seperately. That's just a guess though. I still think ARod had a great season, just not an MVP season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted November 21, 2002 Share Posted November 21, 2002 You didn't answer the question : You say it's about winning and the MVP must come from a winning team ... how do you justify NOT awarding the MVP to a player on the team that wins it all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted November 21, 2002 Author Share Posted November 21, 2002 Grits and Shins:You didn't answer the question : You say it's about winning and the MVP must come from a winning team ... how do you justify NOT awarding the MVP to a player on the team that wins it all? Blitz, I answered the question. When they vote for league MVP no one has actually won the World Series yet so it is impossible to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted November 21, 2002 Share Posted November 21, 2002 Clubfoothead: Grits and Shins:You didn't answer the question : You say it's about winning and the MVP must come from a winning team ... how do you justify NOT awarding the MVP to a player on the team that wins it all? Blitz, I answered the question. When they vote for league MVP no one has actually won the World Series yet so it is impossible to do.No you are coping out ... you are saying that because the writers do it that way ... I'm asking YOU, based on your definition of MVP how can YOU justify saying anybody deserves it other than a member of the World Series Champs. And correct me if I am wrong ... didn't the Angels win the World Series in the end of October and weren't the MVP's announced mid-November? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted November 22, 2002 Author Share Posted November 22, 2002 You are asking me to do the impossible. You want me to do the opposite of what is actually done. The League MVP is announced in mid November, but the writers vote before the playoffs start. Yes, by my standards, I guess there should not be a seperate World Series MVP and a League MVP, in which case I'd agree that the League MVP should be the same person as the World Series MVP. I'd guess the two awards are tied to the players union and incentive clauses in players contracts. Fine, but that is getting off course since it still could not be ARod. What is the point though? All I've ever said is that, under the current system, ARod is not and should not be the league MVP. Tejada vs. Soriano we sort of agree. Personally, although I HATE the Yankees, I think it should have probably have been Soriano, for many of the same reasons you feel it should be ARod - he had one of the best seasons ever for a 2nd baseman AND it brought something of value to his team, the playoffs. With the way the Yankees pitching staff has crumbled I'm also not so sure without Soriano they'd have made the playoffs. The probably would have but I don't think that is gauranteed considering he plays 2nd base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted November 22, 2002 Share Posted November 22, 2002 Clubfoothead: Tejada vs. Soriano we sort of agree.. No ... we do agree ... I'd give it to Soriano before Tejada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatrickL Posted November 22, 2002 Share Posted November 22, 2002 Basically what the MVP says is that no matter how bad your team around you is, you have no chance at winning this award if your TEAM doesn't win. Teams give out their own MVP awards at their year end banquets i'm sure. the MVP doesn't say MOST VALUABLE TEAM MEMBER and all. If you wanna go that route, take ARod off the rangers and check out how many games they finish out of first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted November 22, 2002 Share Posted November 22, 2002 PatrickL:Basically what the MVP says is that no matter how bad your team around you is, you have no chance at winning this award if your TEAM doesn't win. Teams give out their own MVP awards at their year end banquets i'm sure. the MVP doesn't say MOST VALUABLE TEAM MEMBER and all. If you wanna go that route, take ARod off the rangers and check out how many games they finish out of first. And if you take Tejada off his team ... how many games difference does that make, if any? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted November 22, 2002 Author Share Posted November 22, 2002 Grits and Shins: Clubfoothead: Tejada vs. Soriano we sort of agree.. No ... we do agree ... I'd give it to Soriano before Tejada.Gosh, I thought this was the perfect ending to this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.